So I would say that we're more inspired by those third-person games than we are the first-person ones where you have to press a constant crazy button combo to hit the edge of this ledge, to hit this jump, to hit button, to hit the so and so... Because, you know, at the end of the day in a shooter you can't see your feet and all we'd be doing is punishing you for our lack of a user-interface.
When you look to the third-person side of things instead, what you realise is that quite often that method of just pressing and holding a button and leaving it down and letting the game intuitively interpret what it is you're trying to achieve is a much smarter way of doing it.
So if I run towards a table and I'm looking down and I hit my SMART button, I'll slide underneath, if I look up just above it I'll vault up and slide over the top, if I look right up into the air I'll step up and bounce off it perhaps to continue on and do a wall jump.
It's really obvious to the game, because I'm pointing at that location and I'm holding down my sprint button, what I'm trying to achieve. We don't generally sprint at walls and continue sprinting when we arrive.
If I don't want to do that I can let go of SMART at any point or I can still use manual combos to move even more efficiently through the environment. What's critical is we're never forcing you into a canned animation.
When you start climbing up the side of a container you can still look around and reload and fire and shoot and everything. The game - quite overtly - is based on allowing you to interrupt.
So we constantly require you to hold down and continue an action until its completion because, if you start to get shot at and you release the controls, we want the default state of the game to be gun ready to shoot.
So it's different because people are like, "Why do I have to press and hold my top button to stab myself with a syringe or use the SMART movement system or to buff my team-mates?"
It's because if you press square and buff your team-mates by mistake and you go into that animation to throw something, we just took your gun away when someone might be attacking you - that would be an absolute crime in a first person online shooter, so we're very mindful of that stuff not just in the design of SMART but in the implementation of the analogue controls as a whole.
The handheld markets had a boost with two new devices. Would you like to take Brink to the NGP or 3DS given the chance?
I'd certainly like to see Brink on every possible platform but ultimately it's a decision for the publisher and not the developer which platforms it makes it on to and I suspect, to some degree that that will be dictated by sales on the main SKUs it's being released on.
Something to bear in mind though is that many of those very pretty games that you're seeing on the iPhone and other platforms exist because you are essentially on a rail and to a certain degree are witnessing things that are pre-rendered already.
One of the things that we've pulled off with Brink is provide the same gameplay and visual parity across all three platforms whether you're playing on Xbox 360, PS3 or PC so it's the same solid experience no matter what.
Fundamental to Brink's experience is the notion of freedom; you can employ the tactics that you choose, the body type you like, the movement type, the weapons that are customised and modified and then pursue the missions that you like taking the route that you choose to co-operate with your team in a way that suits you, while playing a combat role that suits your preferred playing style.
That amount of freedom comes from masses of depth, so we are absolutely pushing those current consoles to the limit in terms of what they can achieve because we are fully networked at all times, the gameplay and animation and physics cycles are just off the scale and crazily optimised, so I don't know at this point that there's any immediate for a direct port of Brink to another platform.